CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk

Provided by PDXScholar

Portland State University PDXScholar Environmental Science and Management Faculty Environmental Science and Management Publications and Presentations

2008 Engaging Recreational Fishers in Management and Conservation: Global Case Studies

Elise F. Granek Portland State University, [email protected] Elizabeth M.P. Madin M. A. Brown U.S. Bureau of Land Management Will F. Figueira University of Technology, Sydney Darren S. Cameron Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

See next page for additional authors

Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/esm_fac Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Environmental Sciences Commons, and the Zoology Commons

Citation Details GRANEK, E. F., MADIN, E. P., BROWN, M. A., FIGUEIRA, W. W., CAMERON, D. S., HOGAN, Z. Z., & ... ARLINGHAUS, R. R. (2008). Engaging Recreational Fishers in Management and Conservation: Global Case Studies. Conservation Biology, 22(5), 1125-1134.

This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental Science and Management Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Elise F. Granek, Elizabeth M.P. Madin, M. A. Brown, Will F. Figueira, Darren S. Cameron, Zeb Hogan, Gerry Kristianson, Pierre de Villiers, Jack E. Williams, John R. Post, S. Zahn, and R. Arlinghaus

This article is available at PDXScholar: http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/esm_fac/75 Essay Engaging Recreational Fishers in Management and Conservation: Global Case Studies

E. F. GRANEK,∗ E. M. P. MADIN,†∗∗∗∗ M. A. BROWN,‡∗∗∗∗ W. FIGUEIRA,§∗∗∗∗ D. S. CAMERON,∗∗ ∗∗∗ Z. HOGAN,†† G. KRISTIANSON,‡‡ P. DE VILLIERS,§§ J. E. WILLIAMS, J. POST,††† S. ZAHN,‡‡‡ AND R. ARLINGHAUS§§§ ∗Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR 92707, U.S.A., email [email protected] †Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, U.S.A. ‡U.S. Bureau of Land Management, P.O. Box 2965, Portland, OR 97204, U.S.A. §Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Technology, Sydney, P.O. Box 123 Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia ∗∗Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, P.O. Box 1379, Townsville, QLD 4810, Australia ††Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Nevada-Reno, 1000 Valley Road, M.S. 186, Reno, NV 89512, U.S.A. ‡‡Sport Institute, 67 McKenzie Crescent, Sidney, BC V8L 5Y7, Canada §§C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme, CapeNature, Private Bag 5014, Stellenbosch 7599, South Africa ∗∗∗Trout Unlimited, 329 Crater Lake Avenue, Medford, OR 97504, U.S.A. †††Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada ‡‡‡Institute of Inland Fisheries, Im Konigswald¨ 2, 14469 Potsdam-Sacrow, Germany §§§Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Department of Biology and Ecology of , Muggelseedamm¨ 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany, and Humboldt-University of Berlin, Institute of Sciences, Inland Fisheries Management Lab, Philippstrasse 13, Haus 7, 10115 Berlin, Germany

Abstract: Globally, the number of recreational fishers is sizeable and increasing in many countries. Associ- ated with this trend is the potential for negative impacts on stocks through exploitation or management measures such as stocking and introduction of non-native fishes. Nevertheless, recreational fishers can be instrumental in successful fisheries conservation through active involvement in, or initiation of, conservation projects to reduce both direct and external stressors contributing to fishery declines. Understanding fishers’ concerns for sustained access to the resource and developing methods for their meaningful participation can have positive impacts on conservation efforts. We examined a suite of case studies that demonstrate success- ful involvement of recreational fishers in conservation and management activities that span developed and developing countries, temperate and tropical regions, marine and freshwater systems, and open- and closed- access fisheries. To illustrate potential benefits and challenges of involving recreational fishers in fisheries management and conservation, we examined the socioeconomic and ecological contexts of each case study. We devised a conceptual framework for the engagement of recreational fishers that targets particular types of involvement (enforcement, advocacy, conservation, management design [type and location], research, and monitoring) on the basis of degree of stakeholder stewardship, scale of the fishery, and source of impacts (internal or external). These activities can be enhanced by incorporating local knowledge and traditions, tak- ing advantage of leadership and regional networks, and creating collaborations among various stakeholder groups, scientists, and agencies to maximize the probability of recreational fisher involvement and project success.

Keywords: anglers, Atlantic , cutthroat trout, Great Barrier Reef, marine protected areas, recreational fishing, rockfish, stakeholders, taimen, westslope cutthroat trout, yellowfish

∗∗∗∗Authors contributed equally Paper submitted July 18, 2007; revised manuscript accepted January 14, 2008. Correction added after publication 15 July 2008; Authorship was amended for accuracy. 1125 Conservation Biology, Volume 22, No. 5, 1125–1134 C 2008 Society for Conservation Biology DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00977.x 1126 Recreational Fishers and Conservation

Involucrando a Pescadores Recreativos en el Manejo y la Conservacion:´ Estudios de Caso Globales Resumen: Globalmente, el numero´ de pescadores recreativos es considerable y esta´ incrementando en mu- chos pa´ıses. Esta tendencia se asocia con el potencial de impactos negativos sobre la disponibilidad de peces mediante la explotacion´ o medidas de manejo como el aprovisionamiento e introduccion´ de peces no nativos. Sin embargo, los pescadores recreativos pueden jugar un papel decisivo en el ´exito de la conservacion´ de pesquer´ıas mediante su participacion´ activa en, o en el inicio de, proyectos de conservacion´ para reducir los factores estresantes, tanto directos como externos, que contribuyen a la declinacion´ de las pesquer´ıas. El entendimiento de las preocupaciones de los pescadores por el acceso sustentable al recurso y por el de- sarrollo de m´etodos para una participacion´ significativa puede tener impactos positivos sobre los esfuerzos de conservacion.´ Examinamos un conjunto de estudios de caso que demuestran una participacion´ exitosa de pescadores recreativos en actividades de manejo y conservacion´ en pa´ıses desarrollados y en desarrollo, regiones templadas y tropicales, sistemas marinos y dulceacu´ıcolas y en pesquer´ıas de acceso abierto y cer- rado. Para ilustrar los beneficios y retos potenciales de involucrar a pescadores recreativos en el manejo y la conservacion´ de pesquer´ıas, examinamos el contexto socioeconomico´ y ecologico´ de cada estudio de caso. Disenamos˜ un marco conceptual para comprometer a pescadores recreativos que enfoca diferentes tipos de compromiso (coercion,´ intercesion,´ conservacion,´ diseno˜ de manejo [tipo y localidades], investigacion´ y monitoreo) con base en el grado de responsabilidad de las partes interesadas, la escala de la pesquer´ıa y la fuente de impactos (interna o externa). Estas actividades se pueden mejorar mediante la incorporacion´ del conocimiento y tradiciones locales, el aprovechamiento de las redes regionales de liderazgo y la creacion´ de colaboraciones entre los diferentes grupos de inter´es, cient´ıficos y agencias para maximizar la probabilidad de la participacion´ de pescadores recreativos y el ´exito del proyecto.

Palabras Clave: ´areas protegidas, gran barrera arrecifal, Oncorhynchus clarki, partes interesadas, pescadores de cana,˜ pesca recreativa, pez roca, Pleurogrammus monopterygius,salmon´ del Atl´antico, trucha

Introduction meet essential nutritional needs (Arlinghaus & Cooke 2008). Many of the world’s fish populations are in decline. In 2005 77% of the global fishery stocks of known status Significance of Recreational Fishing were either fully exploited (52%), overexploited (17%), depleted (7%), or recovering from depletion (1%; FAO Recreational fishing is extremely popular worldwide, 2006). These declines result from a complex set of pro- with average participation rates of around 10% (Arling- cesses that are internal and external to the fisheries. haus & Cooke 2008). Harvest by recreational fisheries has For instance, industrialized fishing in marine systems been estimated at about 12% of take worldwide for all fish has led to dramatic declines in target stock biomass, (Cooke & Cowx 2004) and 23% for some overfished U.S. alteration of community structure (Pauly et al. 1998; marine fish stocks (Coleman et al. 2004). If recreational Myers & Worm 2003), and long-lasting effects on fish- fishing has not contributed to stock depletion, it may at eries through habitat destruction (Dayton et al. 1995; least be hindering recovery in some localities (Coleman Jennings & Kaiser 1998). Freshwater fishes are also heav- et al. 2004). In many freshwater systems, especially small ily threatened on a global scale (Harrison & Stiassny lakes and streams, recreational fishing is the only source 1999). Whereas their overexploitation has played a role, of fishing mortality and has led to the collapse of at least a host of important factors external to the fishery in- 4 high-profile Canadian recreational freshwater fisheries clude habitat alteration or destruction (e.g., agriculture (Post et al. 2002). and hydropower), water pollution (e.g., eutrophication), In addition to the obvious impact of reducing popu- flow modification (e.g., for flood control), and introduc- lation abundance via harvest mortality, recreational fish- tion and spread of alien (Arlinghaus et al. 2002; ing can have other direct and indirect impacts on fished Cambray 2003). Although commercial fishers have taken populations and their ecosystems. These impacts include the brunt of the blame for fisheries stock depletions in changes in population or community structure due to the ocean (Cooke & Cowx 2006), the role recreational selective harvest, loss of genetic diversity, catch-and- fisheries play in fisheries declines is increasingly recog- release mortality, density- or behaviorally mediated in- nized (Coleman et al. 2004; Cooke & Cowx 2004, 2006; direct interactions, and disturbance resulting from phys- Lewin et al. 2006). Recreational fisheries, although vari- ical trampling, boat traffic, and noise (Lewin et al. 2006). able, can be described as noncommercial fishing activ- Among the most significant impacts of recreational fish- ities that are not the individual’s primary resource to ing are fish stocking and introductions of non-native

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 Granek et al. 1127 fishes (Arlinghaus et al. 2002). Stocking can threaten indigenous species through competition, predation, hy- bridization, and introduction of novel pathogens and par- asites (Lewin et al. 2006) or via changes in nutrient cycles or food-web structure (Eby et al. 2006). A particularly insidious problem with fish stocking and introduction is that they can mask the exploitation-induced effects of recreational fishing (Post et al. 2002; Lewin et al. 2006).

Recreational Fishers as Conservation Partners Despite the negative impacts of recreational fishing, recreational fishers constitute a social group that offers unique potential to positively enhance fish conservation (e.g., Bate 2001; Arlinghaus 2006). Recreational fishers have an inherent interest in the conservation and manage- ment of the fisheries resources on which their leisure ex- Figure 1. Tri-factor contour plot illustrating the perience depends (Arlinghaus 2006). Allowing fishers to primary factors (on axes) that affect the likelihood of participate in developing regulations, within the bounds fisher involvement in conservation efforts (darker set by available stock information from biologists, could shades are more likely). The activities highlighted in lead to increased management success (Sullivan 2003). Table 1 are placed on the surface on the basis of their Aspects or permutations of active management strate- utility and probability of success given the gies such as this (e.g., Pereira & Hansen 2003; Radomski combination of factors. 2003) are particularly relevant under public fishing-rights regimes, where fishers are users of a fishery, but manage- ment decisions are made by agencies. A unique opportu- Case Studies of Recreational Fisher Participation nity for recreational fishers to be involved in conservation also exists under the private fishing-rights regimes char- Each case study is framed within a particular sociopoliti- acteristic of central Europe (Arlinghaus et al. 2002), in cal and ecological context that provides important insight which management and conservation responsibilities lie into understanding the challenges of fisher involvement. with the fisher community through membership in an- The process of involvement and the corresponding out- gling clubs and associations that own or hold leases to comes are provided for each conservation and/or man- fishing rights (Arlinghaus 2006). agement case study. The key lessons learned from involv- Here we present a suite of case studies that highlight ing recreational fishers in the process offer insights to the potential for recreational anglers to be an important guide future involvement efforts, although each situation conservation force. Aspects of these cases may be useful is unique and so too must be its prescriptions for success. for application in other systems because they demon- The case studies are organized by scale from local to re- strate successes and challenges of various strategies of gional and highlight the importance of considering scales recreational fishers’ involvement in achieving conserva- of key factors in fisher involvement strategies (Fig. 1). tion objectives. Successful examples include privately Eurasian Giant Trout in the Eg-Uur Watershed, Mongolia governed recreational fisheries (German case study) and open-access fisheries on 4 continents (North America, The Eurasian giant trout, “taimen” ( taimen), is the Africa, Asia, and Australia). Three of the 6 cases focus world’s largest salmonid, attaining sizes of over 100 kg on salmonids, highlighting simultaneously the world- and 2 m. The taimen, an apex predator, is slow grow- wide popularity of these fishes for angling and the ing, long-lived, and naturally rare making it vulnerable extreme threats they face. Comparing and contrasting to overexploitation. Recreational fishing is common and experiences with recreational fishers’ involvement in fish threatens taimen, especially where recreational fishers conservation in freshwater and marine systems, across use catch and kill methods (steady extractive fishing = a broad geographic spectrum, in developing and devel- 50% of the adult population in 2–3 years and 90% in oped countries, and under different fisheries manage- 10 years). Mining, overgrazing, deforestation, and pol- ment regimes offers key insights into and patterns that lution are also serious long-term threats to taimen and demonstrate how such involvement can lead to enhanced their habitat. Because of these multiple, often interacting, conservation effectiveness. threats, unaffected populations of taimen are restricted

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 1128 Recreational Fishers and Conservation to remote watersheds of and Mongolia. The Eg- A regional project team including anglers, fisheries Uur watershed in northern Mongolia, home to one of the researchers, and water management professionals con- few taimen populations with many large, adult fish, is vened to attract funding for stocking programs and a prime destination for recreational fishers. Evidence of construction of fish passages to facilitate successful overharvest has become apparent at the edges of the wa- recruitment. The Brandenburg Angler Association was tershed as the area becomes more accessible and known instrumental in contributing funds and workers to con- to fishers (Hogan et al. 2006). duct restoration measures and monitor restoration suc- To protect taimen in the Eg-Uur watershed, a local cess. Further funding was generated from the Branden- Mongolian NGO, the Taimen Conservation Fund, estab- burg Fishing Tax, which was financed through fishing lished a conservation project financed by revenues from licence sales and the European Union. recreational fishing. The project provides funds and in- From 1999 to 2007, 490,000 salmon fry, 340,000 frastructure to local managers to prevent a “tragedy of the brown trout fry, and 131,500 salmon fingerlings were commons,” to increase perceived value of taimen protec- stocked from genetically similar stocks in Sweden and tion, and to facilitate business partnerships between local Denmark (salmon) and Schleswig-Holstein, Germany (mi- communities and recreational fishers. grating brown trout). Moreover, intensive habitat man- Fishing fees for catch-and-release ecotourism opera- agement activities took place to improve the longitudinal tions are paid to a community watershed council that connectivity of the Stepenitz system. oversees Eg-Uur River management. Recreational fishers To date, approximately 50% of all migration barriers also contribute in-kind support (boat and equipment use, have been removed in the tributaries of the Stepenitz, air transportation, fishing expertise, and access to clients’ and 64% of potential spawning habitats are now open. fish for tagging, creel surveys, and spawning fish counts) Since 2002 returning adult salmon have been observed to the scientific and enforcement teams. routinely and the first natural recruitment has occurred, The project’s major challenge has been development of although this species is not yet self-sustaining. a legal instrument to treat wildlife as a locally, rather than A major lesson of this project was that an initiative federally, managed resource. Without locally based man- by fishers to restore populations of salmon and trout— agement, communities have little incentive to protect charismatic species of high fisheries value—was posi- the resource, leading to increased levels of fishing and tively viewed by key decision makers, researchers, agen- poaching. Another challenge is developing local funding cies, and funding bodies regionally and internationally. sources and local scientific and monitoring capacity to en- A positive outcome of the project was enhanced envi- sure long-term sustainability. Partnering with in-country ronmental concern and capacity building among fisher researchers and international conservation organizations communities. The integration of all stakeholders in small to develop local management capacity is one possible project teams allowed for rapid conflict resolution with avenue for overcoming this challenge. minimal transaction costs. The major barriers were at- A major success of the project has been the collabora- tracting sustained funding and convincing landowners tion between the Taimen Conservation Fund, scientists, and water managers to allow rehabilitation activities. The and recreational fishers. This cooperation has generated project highlights the important role of local resource in-kind support and funds and improved understanding users (fishers) as promoters of conservation measures of taimen ecology (Hogan et al. 2006). This project has under private fishing-right regimes in Germany (Arling- also demonstrated that, at least on a small scale, local haus et al. 2002; Arlinghaus 2006). No restoration mea- residents, scientists, and recreational fishers can work sure would have been possible without approval of the together to study and protect a threatened species. Brandenburg Angler Association because this organiza- tion holds the lease for fishing rights in the Stepenitz system. Diadromous Salmonids in Brandenburg, Germany Most European rivers have been altered for flood con- Yellowfish in the Orange Vaal River, South Africa trol, irrigation, navigation, hydropower generation, and agriculture, and these alterations have had devastating In the 1990s, concurrent with sociopolitical develop- impacts on habitat quality. As a result, many fish popula- ment in South Africa, there was a lack of governmental tions supporting valuable fisheries, including the Atlantic attention to the country’s pressing environmental issues. salmon (Salmo salar) and migrating forms of brown Development of a large recreational fishery of invasive trout (S. trutta), were driven to extinction in the Ger- alien species, including trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), man state of Brandenburg in the 19th century (Br¨amick bass (Micropterus dolomieu, M. salmoides), and carp et al. 1999). In 1997 the Brandenburg Angler Association (Cyprinus carpio), was one such management project partnered with fisheries researchers to establish a rein- that had detrimental impacts on local indigenous fish pop- troduction program of diadromous salmonids into the ulations (Woodford et al. 2005). A few conservation offi- Stepenitz catchment, a tributary of the Elbe River. cials and conservation-minded flyfishers and bank anglers

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 Granek et al. 1129 deemed necessary a program to restrict the spread of 2003) and are increasingly hybridizing with introduced these non-native species, maintain a healthy aquatic habi- rainbow trout (O. mykiss) as they disperse to higher ele- tats, and protect the native species’ waterways. Two in- vations (Hitt et al. 2003). New road development reduces digenous indicator species were chosen as targets for habitat quality and increases the likelihood of non-native a sustainable replacement fishery: largemouth yellow- trout introduction and subsequent hybridization (Lee fish (Labeobarbus kimberleyensis) and smallmouth yel- et al. 1997). Conservation of the remaining westslope cut- lowfish (L. aeneus), although the former was listed as throat trout populations requires protection of the few near-threatened due to habitat destruction, illegal netting, remaining large blocks of undeveloped habitat. and overexploitation. In response to renewed oil and gas leasing, the Coali- The Orange Vaal River (OVR) is the largest interna- tion to Protect the Rocky Mountain Front was formed to tional river system in Southern Africa. In 1996 the Orange protect wildlands by preventing energy development in Vaal River Yellowfish Conservation and Management As- sensitive roadless areas. The coalition includes individual sociation (OVRYCMA) was established and had 3 goals: fishers, hunters, ranchers, national and regional nonprofit (1) develop yellowfish as a catch-and-release-only fishery, organizations, and the interested public, and benefits (2) assist landowners and interested stakeholders with greatly from its strong partnership between traditional marketing yellowfish catch-and-release angling and gen- environmentalists and fishing and hunting interests. This eral conservation issues, and (3) educate the public about diverse stakeholder group found common ground in their OVRYCMA goals and increase support through a network concern for maintaining wild areas. Through media cov- of interested local and national citizens. Through fisher erage and grassroots lobbying efforts, the coalition has involvement, association volunteers recruited members encouraged hunters and fishers to focus attention on the among local landowners and developed a management impacts of energy development on recreational oppor- strategy to conserve a heavily used and human-affected tunities and to provide their first-hand knowledge of re- area containing important yellowfish habitat. To date, sources at risk. this project has successfully managed over 700 km of Media attention and articles published in popular fish- river frontage. The yellowfish fisheries are now valued ing and hunting magazines proved central to the coali- at R1.2 billion (US$160 million; estimated to be higher tion’s success, and grassroots concerns for fisheries and than the alien species fisheries; de Villiers 2007). Despite wildlife along the Front increased as awareness of threat- ongoing funding challenges, yellowfish fisheries are now ened recreational resources grew among local hunters receiving considerable conservation assistance. Further- and fishers (Connelly 2004; Stalling 2005). Due in part to more, no hatchery-reared yellowfish have been stocked coalition pressure, legislation was passed in 2006 that per- since 2000 and no invasive alien species may be legally manently withdrew public lands along the Rocky Moun- stocked in associated rivers. tain Front from new energy leases and allowed for the The diversity of stakeholders and early involvement of retiring of existing leases. Soon after, the coalition retired the association in guiding the process were critical to another lease through purchase of exploration rights on the association’s success. The OVRYCMA demonstrated almost 10,000 ha of roadless area from an energy firm. that natural resource conservation is possible without Another factor in the coalition’s success has been full government support, but that innovative techniques, its focus on specific areas with high recreational, nat- a focused and committed management team, and agency ural beauty, and wildlife values. In addition to the support of management concepts are critical for success. Rocky Mountain Front, similar coalitions of fishers, The OVRYCMA experience also shows that fundraising hunters, ranchers, and environmentalists have focused efforts are essential to assure project implementation be- attention on energy development as a threat to public yond the “concept” stage. Finally, conservation and man- land that contains high-quality fishery habitats in Col- agement networks with links to the press, interested or- orado’s Roan Plateau, New Mexico’s Valle Vidal, and ganizations, and the public can play a valuable role in the Wyoming Range. Such broad-based coalitions have project success by “marketing” their strategy to stake- gained significant political power (Kohler 2006), which holders. A measure of the initiative’s success is that catch- demonstrates an additional value of coalitions: support and-release angling is now being applied to both fresh- for conservation-focused action in higher-level decision- water and marine indigenous South African species. making processes.

Westslope Cutthroat Trout in Montana, United States Rockfish in British Columbia, Canada In the western United States, Montana’s Rocky Mountain From the early 1990s Canadian recreational fishers com- Front is a well-known center of biological diversity; how- plained to Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans ever, as of 2002, genetically pure westslope cutthroat (DFO) about an apparent decline in rockfish abundance trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) occupied only be- in the Strait of Georgia (5 species of the genus Sebastes tween 13 and 35% of their historic range (Shepard et al. locally called yelloweye [S. ruberrimus], quillback [S.

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 1130 Recreational Fishers and Conservation maliger], copper [S. caurinus], china [S. nebulosus], and multiple-use marine park of approximately 345,000 km2 tiger [S. nigrocinctus]). These fishers were concerned (Fernandes et al. 2005). The GBRMP is facing increasing about the rapidly growing commercial fishery targeting pressure from impacts related to user numbers (e.g., fish- live capture of these species. These reside in eas- ing effort, vessel traffic, habitat damage, pollution) and ily identifiable reef habitat, which makes them particu- climate change (Moscardo & Green 1999; Fernandes et larly susceptible to harvest by recreational charter boats, al. 2005). A primary management tool that affects recre- and there was evidence that the recreational harvest had ational fishing in the GBRMP is a graduated zoning system come to equal commercial extraction (Kronlund et al. in which levels of marine-resources protection vary in 1999). different areas of the park and are implemented through In 2000 recreational fishers began planning practical restrictions or prohibitions of different activities. ways to meet DFO’s 4 new management goals for inshore In 1998 in response to the recognized inadequacy of rockfish: (1) reduce total harvest, (2) establish no-take ar- existing protection in the GBRMP, the GBRMP Author- eas for their protection, (3) improve catch monitoring, ity initiated the Representative Areas Program (RAP) as and (4) establish a stock assessment framework. Two of the basis for rezoning the GBRMP (Day et al. 2002). This these goals required detailed input from the recreational program aimed to enhance regional biodiversity protec- sector—appropriate measures to effect a harvest rate re- tion by developing a network of representative no-take duction of 75% and determine locations for a network of areas. Scientific data and recreational fishers’ data were no-take reserves. The recreational community was repre- used as input to the zoning plan (Cameron et al. 2007). sented by the Sport Fishing Advisory Board (SFAB), which During formal consultations, the GBRMPA received and was established by DFO in the 1960s with a mandate analyzed nearly 32,000 submissions, approximately 45% to provide conservation and management advice to the of which were from people who identified themselves as federal fisheries minister on behalf of 400,000 licensed recreational fishers (DEH 2006). recreational fishers. In 2004 implementation of the Great Barrier Reef Ma- was unacceptable in this case be- rine Park Zoning Plan 2003 increased the no-take areas cause DFO maintained that inshore rockfish rarely survive within the GBRMP from approximately 4.5% to approx- the barotrauma suffered during capture (DFO Canada imately 33% (Fernandes et al. 2005). Information from 2002). The SFAB representatives instead proposed closed consultations with recreational fishers was used to de- periods and areas and a reduction in daily bag limit from 5 termine boundaries of no-take areas, conservation park to 1 (SFAB/DFO Canada 2002). During consultation with zones that prohibit larger-scale fishing activities, and the local SFAB committees, a network of 164 rockfish con- provisions and definitions applied to fishing gears used servation areas (refugia) was identified that accounted in different zones. for approximately 30% of the identified rockfish habitat Despite extensive involvement in the rezoning pro- in the overfished Strait of Georgia. cess, many recreational fishers expressed considerable By 2005, 4 years after implementation of these new dissatisfaction with the rezoning process (DEH 2006), measures, the bag limit reduction combined with a clo- although this sentiment was not universal. Some recre- sure of the lingcod fishery (which overlaps with rock- ational fishing communities were satisfied with their in- fish habitat) resulted in an 81% decrease in the pre- clusion in the process and have subsequently increased implementation recreational harvest of rockfish. When their involvement in GBRMP conservation and man- the lingcod fishery reopened, the recreational rockfish agement activities. An example is the establishment of harvest increased slightly, prompting the SFAB to pro- CapReef, a community-based monitoring program de- pose a further 2-week reduction in the next year’s signed to improve community involvement in manage- lingcod season. This change achieved the desired ef- ment of the GBRMP (CapReef 2005). fect of keeping rockfish mortality within the desired Face-to-face consultation with recreational fishers early limit. in the rezoning process and throughout all phases as- This case demonstrates the contribution that an ef- sisted in their understanding of relevant issues, effective fective and inclusive consultation process can make to input, and subsequent support of the process. Commu- recreational fisheries management. Giving recreational nity information sessions provided an informative, non- stakeholders direct responsibility for helping solve man- threatening, and inclusive environment (Thompson et al. agement problems not only required them to become 2004). The use of geographic information systems to much more knowledgeable about the species and their communicate place-based information was essential dur- habitat, but it was also good for the fishery and the fish. ing rezoning (Lewis et al. 2003), and zoning maps with boundary coordinates and updated electronic charts in- creased fisher support and compliance with the new no- Rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia take areas. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP), created in Despite exhaustive efforts by the GBRMP Authority 1975 and a World Heritage Site since 1981, is a large, in communication and consultation, the credibility of

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 Granek et al. 1131 well-documented, GBRMP-specific, scientific informa- activities (Table 1). A particular challenge in large-scale tion supporting an increased network of no-take areas management is that cooperation between decision mak- was often questioned by fishers (Jago et al. 2007). There ers, agencies, nongovernmental organizations and fishers was a general sense of dissatisfaction with loss of fish- can be difficult, expensive, time consuming, and depend eries access; thus, convincing recreational fishers that on government input. Additional considerations related their views were incorporated in outcomes that do not to the scale factor include fishers’ capacity in terms of reflect all of their preferred alternatives has been an on- leadership, resources, and level of organization; agency going challenge. role and resources to complement or supplement fishers’ resources; and other stakeholder groups that may act in concert with anglers’ organizations. The type and probability of recreational fisher involve- Discussion ment in conservation is also related to the nature of the threat to the fishery. When fishers are protecting a val- Our case studies highlight key types of recreational ued resource from threats external to recreational fish- fisher engagement in management, including monitor- ing, such as commercial fishing, habitat destruction, or ing, research, enforcement, conservation, management invasive species, fisher involvement is likely to be high. design (types and location), and advocacy and educa- Nevertheless, where threats are diffuse or otherwise di- tion (Table 1). These key activities developed out of rectly attributable in whole or part to recreational fishing, specific needs in each situation and offer guidance on there may be greater resistance by fishers to direct con- how recreational fishers can become involved in future servation involvement. projects. One unifying characteristic across these case When the combination of factors leads to a high like- studies is that recreational fishers may offer significant lihood of fisher involvement (Fig. 1, top of triangle), in- resources including, but not limited to, knowledge of spa- creased opportunity exists to involve recreational fishers tial patterns of resource use and availability (Canada, Aus- in multiple types of engagement (e.g., enforcement, ad- tralia, Germany, Mongolia) direct involvement in restora- vocacy, conservation, and research; Table 1). The case tion projects (South Africa, Germany); political leverage studies highlight the net benefit to conservation real- (United States); and grassroots support for research and ized when such involvement occurs. For example, col- conservation measures (Mongolia, Germany). laboration between scientists and recreational fishers The key activities (Table 1) are predicted to vary in can provide valuable and otherwise unobtainable (in a effectiveness with each case (Fig. 1). Through synthe- cost-effective manner) data on poorly studied species. sis of these case studies, we identified 3 primary factors Research-oriented programs are also likely to be more that affected the appropriate type and likelihood of in- successful if local fisher knowledge, site-specific tradi- volvement: (1) stakeholder degree of stewardship (low tions, and key stakeholders and networks are incorpo- to high), (2) scale of the resource, user group, or man- rated. Partnerships can be more self-sustaining if recre- agement structure (small to large), and (3) source of im- ational fishers provide funds and contribute to follow-up pact(s) on the fishery (internal, external, or a combina- monitoring. Such partnerships are, in the long term, effec- tion) (Fig. 1). tive at increasing local capacity and fundraising, generat- Stakeholder environmental stewardship is an impor- ing data, and providing education and incentives for local tant factor because it facilitates support of management people to protect natural resources. Monitoring and en- and conservation measures and a high level of commit- forcement of closed areas is typically poorly funded and ment. High stewardship among fishers also fosters trust is thus an area in which fisher cooperation can mean the among stakeholder groups and between stakeholders and difference between success and failure. The case studies researchers. When fishers have a high degree of steward- in South Africa, Montana, and British Columbia demon- ship, through personal experiences or effective educa- strate instances in which conservation would likely not tional programs, they are more likely to become actively have happened at all were it not for the initiative of recre- engaged in conservation (e.g., advocacy in Montana, con- ational fishers. The cases presented thus highlight the servation in Mongolia, enforcement in Germany; Fig. 1). net positive benefit to conservation of recreational fisher In our case studies the scale of the fishery, including involvement. size of the resource, user group, and management area, Despite the highly decentralized and heterogeneous was often inversely related to the probability of fisher nature of the world’s recreational fishery sector (Sutinen engagement. If the resource is small, fishers are more & Johnston 2003), our case studies highlight that fishers’ likely to feel responsible for its conservation (Arlinghaus active involvement in conservation can occur at multiple 2006) and may perceive that there is a great probabil- levels under private and public fishing rights regimes. ity that their actions will affect change (i.e., high level Recreational fishers in open-access fisheries have his- of behavioral control; Ajzen 1991). Thus involvement is torically contributed indirectly to aquatic conservation more likely and may be effective in multiple types of via permit and license sales and self-monitoring of their

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 1132 Recreational Fishers and Conservation

Table 1. Synthesis of successful recreational fisher engagement in management and conservation.

Type of Example of past success participation Activity by fishers Benefit utilizing this strategy

Monitoring collect standard suite of establishment and population of rockfish conservation area quantitative and qualitative data standardized catch database(s) at one (British Columbia, Canada) on fish caught: species, location, or more scales: local, regional, size, sex, condition national, international taimen fishery (Mongolia) salmonids (Germany) creation of tools for assessing other key parameters trends in target fish stocks fishing effort catch per unit effort spatial patterns of fishing effort fishing-community demographics possible early indicators of disease, other stock issues Involvement in direct support additional resources to support taimen fishery (Mongolia) fisheries research research train scientists in efficient catch provision of expertise and training to Representative Areas Program methods scientists, accelerated achievement of (Great Barrier Reef, Australia) research objectives catch fish for scientists indirect support in-kind support (boat use; salmonids (Germany) equipment use) financial support (e.g., via angling organizations) Enforcement self- and peer monitoring reduced management expenses yellowfish fishery (South Africa) increased compliance with regulations freeing of management resources for other tasks Promote pay user fee revenue generation Rockfish Conservation Area conservation join conservation group(s) improved record-keeping of fishers and (British Columbia, Canada) fishing activities engage in conservation-based fostering of a sense of investment in cutthroat trout fishery approach to resource use fishers for their resource (Montana, USA) increased compliance with regulations salmonids (Germany) Involvement in give input into design process increased support for reserves Channel Islands (USA) protected area design identify prime fishing areas siting reserves where they minimize Representative Areas Program assist with quota determination impacts on recreational fisheries (Great Barrier Reef, Australia) while meeting scientific criteria Advocacy across support conservation in other larger contingent of advocates to cutthroat trout fishery systems/ systems support conservation of a given (Montana, USA) education fishery or habitat increased understanding of linkages yellowfish fishery (South Africa) between healthy marine and freshwater fisheries and good fishing quality salmonids (Germany)

“favorite fishing holes,” but our case studies demonstrate 2001; Arlinghaus 2006). Nevertheless, even in a private opportunities for more direct involvement. Closed-access fishing-rights regime, major challenges for sustainable fisheries, with legal requirements to manage and con- recreational fisheries management exist, including fish- serve that accompany purchase of fishing rights, have ers’ lack of awareness when they contribute to stock de- a distinct history of fishers’ management and resource clines and the negative impacts of stocking (Arlinghaus conservation inter alia due to an intrinsic self-interest 2006). Prime opportunities to involve fishers in conser- and direct benefits from enhanced fish stocks (e.g., Bate vation may occur in programs and organizations that

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 Granek et al. 1133 represent recreational fishing. Within functioning an- Connelly, J. 2004. Frontal assault. National Wildlife Magazine 42:25–30. gler and community organizations, ample opportunities Cooke, S. J., and I. G. Cowx. 2004. The role of recreational fishing in exist to work directly with managers, scientists, and other global fish crises. BioScience 54:857–859. Cooke, S. J., and I. G. Cowx. 2006. Contrasting recreational and com- stakeholders to provide additional resources to support mercial fishing: searching for common issues to promote unified scientific data collection, project implementation, and conservation of fisheries resources and aquatic environments. Bio- monitoring (CapReef 2005). This can, in the long term, logical Conservation 128:93–108. reduce stressors on aquatic systems, which can enhance Day, J., et al. 2002. The Representative Areas Program for protecting bio- socioeconomic benefits of recreational fisheries and fos- diversity in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. Pages 687– 696 in M. K. Moosa, editor. Proceedings of the ninth international ter dedicated recreational fisher involvement in conser- coral reef symposium 2000. Ministry of Environment, Indonesian vation and management. Institute of Sciences, International Society for Reef Studies, Jakarta, We contend, on the basis of the global case studies Indonesia. presented here, that recreational fishers can facilitate Dayton, P. K., S. F. Thrush, M. T. Agardy, and R. J. Hofman. 1995. Envi- successful conservation projects to counterbalance the ronmental effects of marine fishing. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 5:205–232. potential downsides associated with recreational fishing DEH (Department of Environment and Heritage). 2006. Review of the (e.g., Post et al. 2002; Coleman et al. 2004). Our frame- Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975. Review panel report. work (Fig. 1) provides a roadmap for improved fisher Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra, participation in conservation and management of eco- Australia. Available from http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/ nomically and socially valuable fishery resources and a publications/gbr-marine-park-act.html (accessed March 2007). de Villiers, P. 2007. The state of yellowfishes in South Africa 2007. guide for involving recreational fishers in other conser- Pages 7–14 in L. Wolhuter and D. Impson, editors. Report for the vation projects. Water Research Commission by the Yellowfish Working Group. WRC Report TT 302/07. Water Research Commission, Pretoria. DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans) Canada. 2002. Back- Literature Cited grounder BG-PR-02–007E. DFO Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Avail- able from http://www-comm.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pages/release/ Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior bckgrnd/2002/bg007_e.htm (accessed March 2007) and Human Decision Processes 50:179–211. Eby, L. A., W. J. Roach, L. B. Crowder, and J. A. Stanford. 2006. Effects of Arlinghaus, R. 2006. Overcoming human obstacles to conservation of stocking-up freshwater food webs. Trends in Ecology & Evolution recreational fishery resources, with emphasis on Europe. Environ- 21:576–584. mental Conservation 33:46–59. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2006. The state of the world Arlinghaus, R., and S. J. Cooke. 2008. Recreational fisheries: socio- fisheries and aquaculture 2006. FAO Fisheries Department, Rome. economic importance, conservation issues and management chal- Fernandes, L., et al. 2005. Establishing representative no-take areas in lenges. In press in B. Adams, editor. Recreational hunting, conserva- the Great Barrier Reef: large scale implementation of theory on tion and rural livelihoods: science and practice. Blackwell Science, marine protected areas. Conservation Biology 19:1733–1744. Oxford, United Kingdom. Harrison, I. J., and M. L. J. Stiassny. 1999. The quiet crisis: a prelimi- Arlinghaus, R., T. Mehner, and I. G. Cowx. 2002. Reconciling tradi- nary listing of the freshwater fishes of the world that are extinct or tional inland fisheries management and sustainability in industrial- ‘missing in action.’ Pages 271–331 in R. D. E. MacPhee, editor. Ex- ized countries, with emphasis on Europe. Fish and Fisheries 3:261– tinctions in neartime: causes, contexts, and consequences. Plenum 316. Press, New York. Bate, R. 2001. Saving our streams: the role of the Anglers’ conservation Hitt, N. P., C. A. Frissell, C. C. Muhlfeld, and F. W. Allendorf. 2003. association in protecting English and Welsh Rivers. The Institute of Spread of hybridization between native westslope cutthroat trout, Economic Affairs and Profile Books, London. Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi, and nonnative rainbow trout, On- Br¨amick, U., U. Rothe, H. Schuhr, M. Tautenhahn, U. Thiel, C. corhynchus mykiss. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sci- Wolter, and S. Zahn. 1999. Fische in Brandenburg: Verbreitung ences 60:1440–1451. und Beschreibung der m¨arkischen Fischfauna. Ministerium fur¨ Hogan, Z., D. Gilroy, J. Vander Zanden, S. Chandra, B. Allen, and M. Er- Ern¨ahrung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten des Landes Brandenburg and denebat. 2006. Taimen conservation project: interim Science Team Institut fur¨ Binnenfischerei e.V. Potsdam-Sacrow, Groß Glienicke. report. Taimen Conservation Fund, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Mercedes Druck, Berlin. Jago, B., et al. 2007. Involving the community early—the variable role Cambray, J. A. 2003. Impact on indigenous species biodiversity caused that communities can play in MPA management: experiences and by the globalization of alien recreational freshwater fisheries. Hy- lessons learned on the Great Barrier Reef. Pages 353–355 in J. C. Day, drobiologia 500:217–230. J. Senior, S. Monk, and N. Neal, editors. First international marine Cameron, D. S., et al. 2007. Use of fisheries data in rezoning protected areas congress conference proceedings. Available from the great barrier reef marine park. 2007. Pages 445–446 in J. http://www.impacongress.org (accessed July 2007) C. Day, J. Senior, S. Monk, and N. Neal, editors. First inter- Jennings, S., and Kaiser, M. J. 1998. The effects of fishing on marine national marine protected areas congress conference proceed- ecosystems. Advances in Marine Biology 34:201–352. ings. Available from http://www.impacongress.org (accessed July Kohler, J. 2006. Outdoors fans unite on development. Associated Press, 2007). Rifle, Colorado. CapReef. 2005. Information on a community monitoring pro- Kronlund, A. R., K. L. Yamanaka, and G. D. Workman. 1999. Inshore gram in the GBRMP. InfoFish, Queensland, Australia. Available rockfish stock assessment for the west coast of Canada in 1998 from http://www.info-fish.net/browseResults.asp? page=1&mode= and recommendations for 1999/2000. Research Document 99/58. viewdetail&name=CapReef (accessed January 2007). Canadian Stock Assessment Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada. Coleman, F. C., W. F. Figueira, J. S. Ueland, and L. B. Crowder. 2004. Lee, D. C., J. R. Sedell, B. E. Rieman, R. F. Thurow, and J. E. Williams. The impact of United States recreational fisheries on marine fish 1997. Broadscale assessment of aquatic species and habitats. Pages populations. Science 305:1958–1960. 1058–1496 in T. M. Quigley et al., editors. An assessment of

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008 1134 Recreational Fishers and Conservation

ecosystem components in the interior Columbia Basin and portions SFAB/DFO (Sport Fisheries Advisory Board/Department of Fisheries and of the Klamath and Great Basins. PNW-GTR-405. U.S. Department Oceans) Canada. 2002. South coast rockfish consultation meeting. of Agriculture Forest Service, Portland, Oregon. Fisheries and Oceans, Canada. Available from http://www- Lewin, W.-C., R. Arlinghaus, and T. Mehner. 2006. Documented and po- comm.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pages/consultations/fisheriesmgmt/ tential biological impacts of recreational fishing: insights for man- rockfish/rockfish032002mr_e.pdf (accessed March 2007). agement and conservation. Reviews in Fisheries Science 14:305– Shepard, B. B., B. E. May, and W. Urie. 2003. Status of westslope cut- 367. throat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi)intheUnitedStates: Lewis, A., S. Slegers, D. Low, L. Muller, L. Fernandez, and J. Day. 2003. 2002. Westslope Cutthroat Trout Interagency Conservation Team, Use of spatial analysis and GIS techniques to rezone the Great Barrier Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Bozeman, Montana. Reef Marine Park. Coastal GIS workshop. University of Wollongong, Stalling, D. 2005. Angling for the Front. Big Sky Journal 12:134–141. Australia. Sullivan, M. G. 2003. Active management of walleye fisheries in Alberta: Moscardo, G., and D. Green. 1999. Age and activity participation dilemmas of managing recovering fisheries. North American Journal on the Great Barrier Reef. Tourism Recreation Research 24:57– of Fisheries Management 23:1343–1358. 68. Sutinen, J. G., and R. J. Johnston. 2003. Angling management organiza- Myers, R. A., and B. Worm. 2003. Rapid worldwide depletion of preda- tions: integrating the recreational sector into fishery management. tory fish communities. Nature 423:280–283. Marine Policy 27:471–487. Pauly, D., A. Christensen, J. Dalsgaard, R. Froese, and F. J. Torres. 1998. Thompson, L., B. Jago, L. Fernandes, and J. Day. 2004. Barriers to Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279:860–863. communication—how these critical aspects were addressed during Pereira, D. L., and M. J. Hansen. 2003. A perspective on challenges public participation for the rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef Ma- to recreational fisheries management: summary of the symposium rine Park. Department of the Environment and Water Resources, on active management of recreational fisheries. North American Canberra, Australia. Available from http://gbrmpa.gov.au/_data/ Journal of Fisheries Management 23:1276–1282. assets/pdf_fil/0016 /8251/Breaking_through_the_barriers_15April Post, J. R., M. Sullivan, S. Cox, N. P. Lester, C. J. Walters, E. A. Parkinson, 0420FINAL.pdf (accessed March 2007). A. J. Paul, L. Jackson, and B. J. Shuter. 2002. Canada’s recreational Woodford, D. J., N. D. Impson, J. A. Impson, and I. R. Bills. 2005. The fisheries: the invisible collapse? Fisheries 27:6–17. predatory impact of invasive alien , Micropterus Radomski, P. J. 2003. Initial attempts to actively manage recreational dolomieu (Teleostei: Centrachidae), on indigenous fish in a Cape fishery harvest in Minnesota. North American Journal of Fisheries Floristic Region mountain stream. African Journal of Aquatic Sci- Management 23:1329–1342. ences 30:167–174.

Conservation Biology Volume 22, No. 5, 2008